Judge: Cynthia A Freeland, Case: 37-2022-00037289-CU-BC-NC, Date: 2023-11-03 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 02, 2023

11/03/2023  01:30:00 PM  N-27 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Cynthia A. Freeland

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Breach of Contract/Warranty Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2022-00037289-CU-BC-NC SELLERSFUNDING VS. GG DESIGN GROUP [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 06/26/2023

Plaintiff Sellersfunding Corp. ('Plaintiff')'s motion for an assignment order is granted.

California Code of Civil Procedure ('CCP') § 708.510(a) provides that the court 'may order the judgment debtor to assign to the judgment creditor . . . all or part of a right to payment due or to become due, whether or not the right is conditioned on future developments . . . .' Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.510(a).

CCP § 708.510 'provides an optional procedure for reaching assignable forms of property that are subject to levy, such as accounts receivable, general intangibles, judgments, and instruments. This section does not make any property assignable that is not already assignable. This remedy may be used alone or in conjunction with other remedies provided in [the Enforcement of Judgments Law] for reaching rights to payment, such as execution, orders in examination proceedings, creditors' suits, and receivership.' Casiopea Bovet, LLC v. Chiang (2017) 12 Cal. App. 5th 656, 661. An assignment 'transfers the interest of the assignor. The assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor, taking his or her rights and remedies, subject to any defenses that the obligor has against the assignor prior to notice of the assignment.' FirstMerit Bank, N.A. v. Reese (2015) 242 Cal. App. 4th 408, 413. Courts consider a variety of factors in determining whether to order an assignment, including: (1) The reasonable requirements of a judgment debtor who is a natural person and of persons supported in whole or in part by the judgment debtor.

(2) Payments the judgment debtor is required to make or that are deducted in satisfaction of other judgments and wage assignments, including earnings assignment orders for support.

(3) The amount remaining due on the money judgment.

(4) The amount being or to be received in satisfaction of the right to payment that may be assigned.

Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.510(c). However, '[a] right to payment may be assigned . . . only to the extent necessary to satisfy the money judgment.' Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.510(d).

The court construes Defendant GG Design Group dba Soft Serve Clothing ('Defendant')'s lack of opposition as a concession of the motion's merits. See San Diego Rules of Court, Rule 2.1.19.B. In addition, the evidence shows that on December 8, 2022, the court entered a $560,073.92 default judgment in Plaintiff's favor and against Defendant (the 'Judgment'). See ROA No. 18; Brodkin Decl., ¶ 4. On April 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment under which it acknowledged that it received $80,000.00 from Defendant in partial satisfaction of the Judgment. See Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2989880 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  SELLERSFUNDING VS. GG DESIGN GROUP [IMAGED]  37-2022-00037289-CU-BC-NC ROA No. 26. The total amount outstanding on the Judgment is $480,073.92. See Brodkin Decl., ¶ 4.

Defendant conducts business online and receives funds from customers by way of credit card payments through various companies including, but not limited to, Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and PayPal. Ibid., ¶¶ 5, 7. Defendant sells its products through various platforms, including Poshmark, Amazon, and softserveclothing.com. Ibid., ¶ 6. Based on the foregoing, the court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated entitlement to an assignment order. By failing to oppose the motion, Defendant has not set forth any factors that would preclude the issuance of such an order.

In light of the foregoing, the court grants the motion and issues an order assigning to Plaintiff all sales proceeds, commissions, and cash earned by Defendant through Defendant's sale of goods and services on Poshmark, Amazon, and softserveclothing.com. This includes all amounts owed to Defendant as a result of transactions with various credit card companies including, but not limited to, Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and PayPal. This Order shall remain in place until the Judgment is fully satisfied. See Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.510(d). The effect and priority of this assignment shall be governed by California Civil Code ('CC') § 955.1. Plaintiff shall be deemed a bona fide assignee for value under CC § 955.1. See Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.530(a). This Order shall not affect the rights of any obligor(s) to Defendant until the obligor(s) receive notice of the Order. See Cal. Code Civ. P. § 708.540.

This is the tentative ruling for the hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, November 3, 2023. If no party appears at the hearing, this tentative ruling will become the order of the court as of November 3, 2023. If the parties are satisfied with the court's tentative ruling or do not otherwise wish to argue the motion, they are encouraged to give notice to the court and each other of their intention not to appear, though this notice is not required.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2989880